tv The Lead With Jake Tapper CNN September 3, 2014 1:00pm-2:01pm PDT
is. that's the scary thing is. we don't know how long we have. we don't know how severe the threat is and we have to trust the people that we have in power. >> in office. >> right. and that's why it's a little frustrating when we really can't tell that the president yet has his arms on the situation. >> ron fournier, thank you very much for joining me from washington. you are about to hear more the interview with secretary of defense with chuck hagel. i'm brooke baldwin. "the lead" starts right now. president obama vowed to destroy isis and he said the goal was to make isis a manageable problem. so which is it? i'm jake tapper. this is "the lead." >> the bottom line is this -- our objective is clear. >> is it though? is it clear? in the world lead, can you contain a threat like isis or does one have to wipe it off the face of the earth completely?
president obama seemingly contradictory remarks might make it difficult to know exactly what he thinks especially after isis beheaded a second american. also, he called the threat from isis, quote, beyond anything we've seen before. maybe defense secretary chuck hagel can better explain the u.s. strategy to fight isis if there is one yet. in an exclusive cnn interview. and the politics lead, while foreign affairs are grabbing the headlines, control of the u.s. senate hangs in the balance here at home. our surprising new poll on a race that is on track to be the most expensive senate race in history. ♪ ♪ ♪ -- captions by vitac -- www.vitac.com good afternoon, everyone. welcome to "the lead." i'm jake tapper. we'll begin with the world lead. president obama has not yet formulated or articulated a com tre hencive strategy to take on isis the jihadists running
rampant, and he responded to the video isis released showing the second beheading of an innocent american by these terrorists in as many weeks. the president had just landed in estonia, the first stop on his four-day trip that will include a key nato conference in wales and just as the president did after isis executed american james foley, president obama sternly condemned isis over steven sotloff, the american beheaded in the most recent horrific isis video, but then president obama's critics are saying then he undercut his own message just a few sentences later. >> the bottom line is this, our objective is clear. that is to degrade and destroy isil so that it is no longer a threat. >> president obama's clear objective toward the terrorists known as isis or isil was laid out this morning during a joint press conference with the president of estonia. >> will you have a full strategy
of isis? >> to john fournier that may have been blurred. >> we know that if we are joined by the international community we can continue to shrink isil's influence, its effectiveness, its financing, the military capabilities to the point where it is a manageable problem. >> by moving his bottom line from degrade and destroy to make isis a manageable problem in mere minutes. critics say the president once again muddled his message. the terrorist group's barbaric tactics not withstanding. just hours after the president talked about his goal to make isis a manageable problem, the vice president said this. >> we will follow them to the gates of hell until they are brought to justice because hell is where they will reside!
>> and the secretary of state said this -- >> we have taken the fight to this savagery and evil before and believe me, we will will take it again. do the president's at times seemingly contradictory words, reflect ambivalence in a part of the world where he's convinced it can only accomplish so much? is he trying to avoid his predecessor's style. >> there is an old poster out west as i recall that said uponed, dead or alive. >> whatever the reason, the president's words about isis have even alarmed some of his fellow democrats as when the president said this about any plan to target isis in syria. >> we don't have a strategy yet. >> that was quickly followed by this. >> we do have a comprehensive strategy for dealing with isil. >> perhaps any confusion is because the president is still coming to terms with the threat he dismissed to "the new yorker" saying, quote, if a jv team puts
on lakers uniforms that doesn't make them kobe bryant. the threat from isis or isil may be even worse than the threat of al qaeda because of its financing and western memberses. >> they are tremendously well funded. >> oh, this is beyond anything that we've seen. >> the white house is still today trying to insist that there was nothing inaccurate about that january j.v. quote. the president was not singling out isil. he was talking about the the very different threat that is posed by a range of extremists around the globe. >> "the washington post" fact-checked that statement from josh earnest looking at the transcript of the new yorker and saying that the was very specifically about isis and today ernest was awarded four pin be onni pinocchios for a whopper of a
falsehood. >> good to see you, as always. maybe you can help clear this up for me. president obama said today that the u.s. objective is to degrade and destroy isis or isil and just 17 minutes later he talked about making isis a, quote, manageable problem. those seem to be two different scenarios. does the u.s., want, have its objective the destruction of isis or the containment of isis? >> absolutely the united states wants to see isil destroyed and degraded. as the president also said today that's not an overnight exfoffo. it will take time. we do want to take with other countries around the region and other countries around the world to reduce the impact to countries in the region, and we know that will take a while that's why we're building a coalition and talk about a range of abilities they have. >> the two executed and murdered
americans were seized at the turkey-syria border. that strongly suggests that isis in syria is behind those terrorist murders. the president last week said that the u.s. does not yet have a strategy on -- for taking on isis in syria, but the murder of these two americans seems to suggest we should have one soon. when will we hear one articulated? >> first, jake, we're going to hunt down these are troi isis i terrorists who have killed american citizens and have gone out and threatened our people with every resource that we have and certainly the fbi will be the lead in that process. at the same time, the threat that isil poses to the region and to western interests is one that we're already beginning to implement. we've taken more than 120 strikes in iraq. of course, part of that as addressing the humanitarian situation protecting american citizens and degrading isil is something that is a side effect of that, as well.
and having this discussion that the president is having at nato, the secretary will have after the course of his travel is something that's under way as we speak. >> i want to play something that former cia op the rattive bob baer said to me. >> the people that collect tactical intelligence on the ground day to day and this isn't washington, but you know, people collecting this stuff say they're here. isis is here. they're capable of striking. they don't know what their plans and intentions are, but it's a definite concern. >> jen, are there isis operatives, isis cells here on american soil? >> well, jake, look, i think we've been clear that one of our primary concerns is individuals who have western passports who have aligned themselves with terrorist organizations like is isil. obviously, we have a range of tactics to prevent those individuals from coming into the united states, but certainly what we're looking at and what we're focused on is wherever this threat is, wherever it is
growing and the focus of that is really in countries like syria and iraq where we've seen the most growth over the past several months. >> but are they here? >> i don't have any additional information, jake, to provide to you on the comments of that individual. >> thank you so much. jen psaki at the state department. we appreciate your time. up next, president obama overseas to reassure nato allies that the u.s. has their back. can he win their confidence now that russia is measuring ukraine for new curtains. and are you still confused about the u.s. strategy about isis? totally understandable. chuck hagel will try to clear it up for you in his exclusive sitdown with cnn. when folks thit what they get from alaska, they think salmon and energy. but the energy bp produces up here creates something else as well: jobs all over america. engineering and innovation jobs. advanced safety systems & technology. shipping and manufacturing.
not come at a more critical time for president obama. it is also an opportunity to regain footing on the foreign policy front in the midst of the bipartisan backlash perceived by many to be too cautious for its own good. michelle kosinski is live in new port, wales. michelle, there's one word that i did not hear president obama use today when talking about russia and ukraine. the word is invasion. >> reporter: right. exactly. we were just talking about that. we've kind of been keeping a collection of the phrases that president obama and the administration has been using to describe what's been going on in ukraine. today he used the words brazen assault and in the past we've heard things like direct incursion, but they always stay away from the other "i" word, inflation. there are reasons for that, but as they keep emphasizing they still see a diplomatic solution.
no boots on the ground, no military solution and they keep repeating that and today president obama gave this address to the people of estonia and he laid out again, some of it it is the same stuff we've been hearing for months about the need to defend ukraine and keep, really, its goal of territorial integrity, but he also laid out the reasons why he feels that what's been going on well is basically all russia's fault and then listed goals for the summit coming up and ways that could contribute to this collective defense that really this meeting is all about any that includes an expanded military presence, expanded u.s. military presence in europe and that's interesting that is proposed by president obama, jake. >> michelle kosinski, thank you so much. with president obama's arrival in eastern europe came news that russia and ukraine were working toward a cease-fire that sound encouraging except for one hitch. russia insists it cannot make any cease-fire deal because russia is not engaged in the
conflict. joining me now is ambassador richard hoss and former director of policy planning. ambassador hoss, good to see you kno know. a truce was in the works and russia denies it can even make a deal because president putin insists his forces are not in ukraine. what do you make of it all? >> i think you've got it exactly right and what we're likely to see is something in the gray area as we've seen now for months, jake, between what would be a cease-fire and what would be an all-out conflict and you're going have the continuation of a low-level conflict that's intermittent and it will be in geographically desperate places. isn't the timing of this cease-fire or whatever you want to call it a little suspicious coming on the heels of the nato summit and shortly after the president arrived in eastern europe? >> you have to be a healthy believer in coincidences to
think otherwise, but whether it happens or not i'd say two things and one, it's unlikely to last and two, it's unlikely to materially affect what's decided and discussed. >> putin believed his seven-point pla for peace between pro-russian separatists and ukrainian forces. he calls for ukraine to pull its troops from rebel-controlled towns and for ukraine to stop air strikes. it it seems to me, correct me if i'm wrong, but he's basically saying here is the cease-fire terms. surrender and give eastern ukraine to new russia. >> this is a non-starter. the last i checked it's ukraine that is the sovereign entity. so the the idea that they're simply going to pull back and allow the separatists or ethnic russians or whatever you want to call them to essentially create their own mini-state within a state, this is simply not going
to happen. what we don't know is whether this is sort of an opening bid and putin knows this is unacceptable and he want tos start a diplomatic process or he's just toying with people. this sounds to me more of the latter. this is not serious diplomacy. this is not the sort of stuff from which you would compromise. so it's hard to see any silver lining in this. >> let's talk about the administration's reluctance to use the word invasion to describe this. nearly a month ago the u.n. ambassador samantha powers said any further intervention by russia into ukrainian territory even under the guise of humanitarian aid would be considered an invasion, quote, unquote. a week later a convoy of russian trucks rolled into ukraine purporting to be ukrainian help and ukraine called the move an invasion and the obama administration did not then and still has not. why is there a reluctance to call it an invasion? >> the reluctance as i would judge it is simply if you start
using words like invasion it it puts tremendous pressure on you to respond directly and militarily and it's important for everyone to keep in mind that while the united states has important interests in ukraine and what happens, we do not have formal, legal obligations and ukraine is obviously not a member of nato and the administration wants to avoid using language which would pressure it to make more of a local commitment than it wants. instead, what the administration is looking to do is to give limited help to ukraine and instead to use this entire situation to bolster nato, to try to wean, hopefully the europeans somewhat from their dependence on russian energy, to sanction russia and so forth. the bulk of the response is indirect, direct nature element to the response is actually quite modest. >> does it not matter at all that samantha powers said if you do this it would be an invasion and then they did it. it's almost as if that never
happened. >> it's almost as if that never happened simply because this or that ambassador or the u.n. or some other place said something does not make it policy. >> richard haas on the council of foreign relations, thanks so much, as always. >> thanks, jake. the president stopping short of committing americans to a drawn-out military command. just what exactly is the commander in chief saying? >> then they're barbaric and unrepentant and these jihadis are beyond just terrorists and hear what chuck hagel today jim sciutto in a cnn exclusive. that's coming up. so what we're looking for is a way to "plus" our accounting firm's mobile plan. and "minus" our expenses. perfect timing. we're offering our best-ever pricing on mobile plans for business. run the numbers on that. well, unlimited talk and text, and ten gigs of data for the five of you would be... one-seventy-five a month. good calculating kyle. good job kyle. you just made partner. our best-ever pricing on mobile share value plans for business.
welcome back to "the lead." i'm jake tapper. continuing with the world lead, the ongoing threat of barbaricis isis terrorists in iraq and what the u.s. can and will do about it upon. chuck hagel said the is clear, but it's possible he may have raised more question mark in the process and cnn chief financial correspondent jim sciutto joins
me now from new port, rhode island, where he sat down with the secretary of defense. good job and so much to pore over, but what struck you the most on your one-on-one? >> i'll tell you, you and i have talked about this in recent weeks in the response to the threat of isis. there are mixed messages. is it a threat to the u.s. homeland or just to the region? we've heard both from the administration. will the u.s. attack syria and does the president have options on the table? we've heard conflicting things there and a conflicting and imprecise definition as to what the strategy is against isis in iraq, in syria. what is the endgame here? and on those points, we heard more definitive answers, frankly, from president secretary hagel. for instance, he made it it clear that the mission in his words is to destroy, not contain isis. he said in very clear terms that the threat of isis is not just to the region, to iraq, to syria, but also to americans and
that's something we haven't heard to this point. have a listen to how the secretary put it to me just a short time ago. >> we're providing the president with those options to degrade and destroy isil's capability. >> that's the endgame. >> degrade and destroy, not contain. >> it's exactly the opposite of what the president said, degrade and destroy. >> is it a threat to the u.s. or the region some. >> look at what happened in the latest video of another citizen as to what isil did. it is a threat. isil is a threat to this country, to our interests. >> reporter: one other issue where the secretary did not, frankly, give a final answer is will the the president seek further congressional authorization for military action if he chooses to do so in syria. does he believe the current authorizations give him the power he needs? secretary of defense hagel saying that's an option that the president is still considering,
but he did say that the president wants to have congress involved in the decision making process. he did not say, jake, whether or not he needs to go to a vote in congress before he takes military action inside syria. >> do you vow to the american people today that isis will not just be degraded and contained, but destroyed? >> well, vows are something beyond my mortal capacity of doing, but i can tell you this, jim, i know this about this president, this vice president, i know this about everyone in his administration and about myself, we will will do everything to destroy their capacity to inflict harm on our people and western values and our interests. >> i think you heard there, jake, just a very personal
response, something along the lines from what we heard from vice president biden earlier today when he said we'll chase isis to the gates of hell. a visceral, almost, response that as defense secretary he takes this threat seriously seeing those beheading videos a call to action for him and others in the administration. jim sciutto, great work. thank you so much, as always. up next on "the lead." what we have here is a failure to communicate. those words from the movie cool hand luke might best sum up on how some are viewing the president's message on how they will handle ice i. why does the administration not have his members on the same page. our political panel will weigh in coming up. [ female announcer ] we help make secure financial tomorrows a reality
the president's administration is talking tough when it comes to confronting isis. >> we're providing the president with those options to degrade and destroy isil's capability. >> we will follow them to the gates of hell until they are brought to justice. >> we have taken the fight to this kind of savagery and evil before and, believe me, we will take it again. >> but what about the commander in chief himself? should the u.s. be degrading and destroying isis as he said today or just managing and containing the terror group? he said it should become a manageable problem. he also said that today. the president is now facing criticism for sending missed messages about how he plans to deal with isis and joining me to talk about it is bill burton, thanks for being here both bill and bill. i will start with bill burden.
why do you think so many members of the administration sound tougher and angrier about isis than the the commander in chief? >> the the commander in chief is pretty angry. >> i'm not saying he's not. >> and i think this is classic washington. the people have always parsed the president's emotions and looked at little words, degrade and destroy like which is which. the administration is clear. we have to destroy isil. they're beheading americans and they're doing terrible things arc cross the middle east and we have to get in there and do everything to dismantle them. the difference between degrade and devoi and whether or not we can eliminate them off the earth, it will take a multinational force to do it. it will take a multiethnic government in baghdad to make it it stick. at the end of the day we destroyed nazi germany and there are still nazis running around, right? in the case of isil, yes, we can can destroy the leadership and we can destroy the organization itself, but will there still be remnants of people who are associated with isis?
sure. >> mr. crystal, i doubt you agree with that. why don't you weigh in? >> i don't care about the president's exmotions and i don't care that motion if he says that are controversial with each other and i was there with the bush white house decades ago and in the first gulf war and at the time president bush and jim baker and sometimes they said things that were off-message and the media was worried and he acted and we made clear what we were going to do and removed saddam. i wouldn't worry about one bad press conference here and chuck hagel sounding different from john kerry. the president, i don't think, has fundamentally decided here is the problem, i think his foreign policy is in tatters and how the world worked out with his foreign policy is in shambles and he's in denial and he has go through the stages of grief. there's denial and bargaining and anger and then finally, you get to acceptance and i hope
this floundering is the prelude to him accepting that we have to go in and destroy isil which is not saying the first sentence you say at every press conference is no boots on the ground and the second sentence is we need the international community to rally behind us and we have to wait for a good government in iraq. we have to act and then those things are more likely to happen. >> bill burton, do you think it's possible at all that president obama's ambivalence which is not to say opposition, but his mixed feelings about using u.s. force and, look, i understand the u.s. is am booing i bombing u.s. targets in iraq and the first war in iraq was a huge mistake and he feels that the u.s. military there's only so much it can do without the other things and do you think maybe that is behind some of his statements such as turning isis into a manageable problem. >> i would first make the problem that isil wasn't in iraq before the war in rack in 2004.
secondly, any president should be ambivalent about putting u.s. troops on the ground anywhere and the only way to make this work is to have a strategy that works, working with other nations and the fact that malaki is no longer in power as a result of some of the work the united states did, it it allows us to build a coalition of countries that surround iraq and syria folks like the saudis and get them engaged in a way that can make this a much more lasting and permanent situation. this isn't going to work with american bots on the ground and we've tried without a great strategy any without a lot of foreign nations helping out. upon that doesn't work. what we need to cois to get the nations in the neighborhood involved and we need to get the nations in the west involved and make sure that we have a sustained solution to the problem -- >> but i would like you to address the idea that you invoke george h.w. bush. one of the things anything on is -- and you know every president has the reaction to the previous one.
he doesn't want to make the same mistake george w. made, maybe not taking more time. is that what's going on? >> he's been president for years, and with no isil anywhere, and now he's let it it grow up by syria and by getting out of iraq and let's leave it all behind him. i'll stop talking about it if he would get serious for the last two years of his term and it is a fantasy to say we can't send in troops until the whole international coalition is there and no one will rally until they know we're serious. >> thank you so much. appreciate it. i don't think you guys agree on this. >> coming up on "the lead," new cnn polling out just this hour showing the senate minority leader mitch mcconnell is in the fight of his political life. could the top senate republican be out of a job come november. michael brown's death sparked outrage and a st. louis
newspaper wants to know what, if any crimes, the slain teen had on his juvenile record. that's ahead. you, my friend are a master of diversification. who would have thought three cheese lasagna would go with chocolate cake and ceviche? the same guy who thought that small caps and bond funds would go with a merging markets. it's a masterpiece. thanks. clearly you are type e. you made it phil. welcome home. now what's our strategy with the fondue?
what are you waiting for? you could literally be done with the test by now. now you could have done it twice. this is awkward. go to comcastbusiness.com/ checkyourspeed. if we can't offer faster speeds or save you money we'll give you $150. comcast business built for business. welcome back to "the lead." i'm jake tapper. more politics now. down to the wire. just 62 days remaining until the elections that will decide who controls capitol hill and while we are drilling down on these virtually important house senate and gubernatorial fights, cnn will any in-depth with five key races to watch this midterm season and today we'll take a look at what may be the most high profile and certainly the most expenses of all the races
this year, the bitter battle for the senate seat in kentucky. a race pitting minority leader mitch mcconnell in the fight of his political life against kentucky secretary of state alison lundergan grimes, a democrat. while we have breaking news to report, according to brand new cnn polling conducted through monday and released this hour, this is still anyone's race. mcconnell leads grimes by just four points among likely voters. that's an edge equal to margin of error. midterms can often prove to be . midterms can often prove to be a referendum on the party, holding the white house as cnn's latest polling and it shows just a third of likely kentucky voters axe prove of the job president obama is doing. our chief congressionkoncongres correspondent dana bash is following this closely. it looks like it will be a real dog might. >> this is critical because of
the fact that mitch mcconnell's win would have a huge impact on not only the takeover of the senate and the president's last two years in office and going ty different candidates to choose from. >> this year's marquee political race is a stud ney cy in contra novice running to be the first female senator. >> mitch mcconnell's washington is not working for kentucky. the senate republican to win and take over the senate. >> there is nobody barack obama wants to beat worse than mitch mcconnell and there's nothing that i would like better for him to have a bad night november 4th, what do you think about that some. >> mitch mcconnell is the ultimate political tactician and old school bring home the bacon on. $15 million for the river front has done great things for owensboro, but he's not a warm and fuzzy campaigner at all. >> alison lundergan grimes is a
natural at pressing the flesh with voters and lights up supporters at rallies. >> i don't know if i want to call him, senator no-show, senator shutdown, but what i do know is he's not working for kentucky. in interviews she often sounds scripted. >> give me some kentucky candor. is the president a drag on you here? >> i think kentuckyans are seeing this race for what it is, a chance to move kentucky forward in the right direction. >> is giving mcconnell his toughest challenge in years, getting help from family friend, bill clinton and airing clever tv ads. >> senator, why did you vote two times against pay for women? >> his goal, tied her to president obama who if 2012 won four of the 120 counties and is even more unpopular now. >> she's a new face for the
status quo. a new face to vote for barack obama. >> reporter: she paints him as the person picatiification of washington dysfunction. he has nothing left to give to the people of this state, no new ideas and promising further gridlock. you have to hear mcconnell's retort to believe it, the 30-year senate veteran is running as an agen of change. >> the candidate for change is the guy you're looking at. if you don't like obama flip the senate and put him in charge. the only thing they can do in 2014 is to change the makeup of the senate. >> he appeals to state pride by telling voters he'd be the second kentucky majority leader in history, but his ambition is very personal. >> you know the joke that most senators look in the mirror and see a future president. you, at least -- >> i never had that problem. >> i don't have that affliction. >> but you have always wanted to be the majority leader of the senate, is that fair to say? >> i would like to have the
chance to be the majority leader of the senate, yes. >> mcconnell ended this summer with some stumbles. his campaign manager resigned in 2008 and democrats pounced on secretly recorded, in a coke brothers meeting. >> grimes' has had problems, too of accusation of a sweetheart deal brokered by her father, a prominent businessman and former state party chair. >> they're baseless, bullying accusations from mitch mcconnell. it's a high stakes race bound to get very ugly. >> ugly and expensive. in fact, sources in both parties estimate it will likely be the most expensive senate race in history. all told, jake, it will probably cost north of $100 million. this is a senate race in kentucky which is not exactly the most exactly the most
expensive media market. >> grimes is famous or infamous for running very, very tough campaigns and it's also a challenge for a man to do that to a woman. >> it is, and i thought the other interesting part of our poll was one of the first things i can was went to work at the gender gap to see if there is one. grimes has been running as a woman and running appealing to female voters and there isn't considering the traditional gender gap with the parties there isn't that much of a gender gap and it is surprising given the the fact that she is running it. so far he's handled it deftly, but it is not so easy. >> let's talk about some other breaking news today. according to "the milwaukee sentinel," debbie wasserman schultz just made a roundtable comment at the athletic can cut, she was campaigning against the governor of wisconsin. i know that is stark and i know that is direct, but that is reality. what republican tea party
extremists like scott walker are doing is they are grabbing us by the hair and pulling us back. it is not going to happen on our watch. this is blowing up, these comments, a very controversial comparing politics to domestic abuse of sexual assault or whatever. what's the response for the wasserman-schultz campaign some. >> they do have a response because they understand this is blowing up big time. domestic violence is an incredibly serious issue and the congresswoman was by no means belittling the very real pain that survivors experience. scott walker's policies had been bad for wisconsin's women. it is not going to be the end of this. >> probably not. dana bash, thank you so much. great work. if michael brown the unarmed teenager kill immediate missouri have a juvenile record does the public have a right to know? is it relevant? the battle over it in court right now.
big day? ah, the usual. moved some new cars. hauled a bunch of steel. kept the supermarket shelves stocked. made sure everyone got their latest gadgets. what's up for the next shift? ah, nothing much. just keeping the lights on. (laugh) nice. doing the big things that move an economy. see you tomorrow, mac. see you tomorrow, sam. just another day at norfolk southern. but parallel parking isn't one you do a lof them.ings great. you're either too far from the curb. or too close to other cars... it's just a matter of time until you rip some guy's bumper off. so, here are your choices: take the bus. or get liberty mutual insurance. for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise your rates due to your first accident.
welcome back to "the lead." i'm jake tapper. our national lead. the community of ferguson, missouri is putting itself back together after the shooting of unarmed michael brown. the st. louis post dispatch filed a petition to unseal any existing juvenile records on brown who was shot dead by officer darren wilson on august 9th. we are awaiting the ruling on that. the paper reports a court official did reveal that brown was never found delinquent of any of the most serious felonies as a juvenile. brown had no adult criminal record. brown's death, of course, led to a chorus of demands for police reforms and one of those voices belongs to democratic missouri senator claire mccaskill with whom i spoke earlier.
>> last time i saw you, senator, you were walking on west fluorescent avenue in ferguson, hoping that the likes of me would leave so tensions can cool in ferguson. i want to ask you about some of the measures that you're hoping to take in the wake of that chaos and that tragedy. police militarization, for example, you will be holding a hearing next week and lieutenant mitchell o'brien with the huntington beach, california police department said friday that these are the the tools that law enforcement unif notally needs to meet the threats in this day and age. you've been a critic of the militarized images we saw out of ferguson. what's your response to police who say they need these kinds of weapons, they need these kinds of armored vehicles some. >> we have three separate programs and they haven't had enough oversight and that's what this is about. it's about looking at the department of defense programs, the department of homeland
security programs and how much are we buying and how is it being utilized and how effectively is it being utili d utilized? what kind of training? and after what i saw in ferguson, and by the way, i saw both. i saw an overmilitarized response against peaceful protesters. i also saw the use of a wrapped vehicle to bring law enforcement officers to safety when they were being challenged in a very dangerous situation. so this is going to be a really not going in with any bias, but a laundry list of questions that any of us should have about this equipment, who is paying for it and how is it being utilized some. >> speaking of who is paying for it, you want to withhold federal funding from police departments unless they start using body cams and i believe right nowrt missouri, had had body cams and
that's not the case anywhere in the country. looking at just the back of an envelope here and even the low-end cams cost $300 a pop and there are $450,000 police officers in the nation. who should foot the bill for body cams for them all? >> well, i think we need to look at what we're buying and giving local police departments from the federal government and maybe we need to put body cams at the top of the list. maybe you don't qualify for other weaponry from the federal government until you have purchased body cams. i think we can look at a variety of different strategies, but frankly, and this is about mrekting police officers, jake. somebody can film the end of a police altercation and get a much different impression than what the reality was when a police officer is confronted in a dangerous situation. so having a complete video of what actually occurred many times will protect the officer and certainly protect the public
because we would have video sometimes of a crime being committed which is pretty powerful evidence in a courtroom. >> lastly, senator, the fate of the senate is hanging in the balance as i don't need to tell you. you are a democrat who has won in a red state. what advice on keeping the senate would you give to your fellow red-state democrats? >> well, all of them have shown independence from their party when it was important to represent their states, and i think that is what voters want to know. they are tired of all the political games being played in washington. they want to know their senator is willing to put all of that aside and do what's right for their state. if they can stay on that message they'll try to beat these people because they're in the same party as the president or because they voted
for the health care bill, but time and time again these senators have shown moderation, willingness to compromise and willingness to work across the aisle and most
importantly they've shown they care deeply about their state. i am cautiously optimistic about the colleagues running in red states this year. >> thank you so much for joining us. >> thank you. that's it for "the lead." i'm jake tapper and i turn you over to wolf blitzer next door in "the situation room". >> jake, thanks very much. happening now -- >> we will follow them to the gates of hell until they are brought to justice! >> gates of hell, the vice president talking tougher than the exandriner in chief who first says he wants to destroy the terror group and then says he wants to make it a manageable problem. he taunts and i'm quoting him now, i'm back, obama. you'll see how investigators are now trying to identify the isis executioner through images, words and actions. and 9/11 worries. even as u.s. leaders vow to go after isis does america also need to be on the